192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
layman
 
  -4  
Fri 22 Dec, 2017 07:09 pm
@blatham,
So far, the only significant evidence of "collusion with Russia" revealed by Mueller is against Hillary, Obama, and the corrupt FBI. Why in the hell would Trump want him fired?

The more investigation, the more better, eh?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Fri 22 Dec, 2017 07:12 pm
@roger,
You'll get no argument from me on that, roger. But of course this is a very important factor to those who aren't insane and/or anarchists of the Bannon sort who wish to just tear everything down.
0 Replies
 
Builder
 
  -2  
Fri 22 Dec, 2017 07:13 pm
@layman,
Quote:
These investigations had been going on for about 8 years and massive evidence had been compiled for prosecution prior to being abandoned by the Obama-corrupted DOJ.


There's much that we don't know about this, but the timing seems critical to me.

I listened to a few speeches made by AG Sessions, and he's quietly confident, rather than bombastic about this. That tells me it's worth a bit more of my focus.

Days from Christmas, and so much going down.
Lash
 
  0  
Fri 22 Dec, 2017 07:38 pm
@Builder,
There are about five fervent battles for the soul of this country going on right now—each one, seemingly unaware of the other.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -4  
Fri 22 Dec, 2017 07:46 pm
@Builder,
This is a long (and long-researched) article by the senior investigative reporter who pieced together the story over the course of about a year--interviewing dozens of Obama-era government agents. It starts out like this:

Quote:
The Obama administration derailed an ambitious law enforcement campaign targeting drug trafficking by the Iranian-backed terrorist group Hezbollah, even as it was funneling cocaine into the United States, according to a POLITICO investigation.

The campaign, dubbed Project Cassandra, was launched in 2008 after the Drug Enforcement Administration amassed evidence that Hezbollah had transformed itself from a Middle East-focused military and political organization into an international crime syndicate that some investigators believed was collecting $1 billion a year from drug and weapons trafficking, money laundering and other criminal activities.

Over the next eight years, agents working out of a top-secret DEA facility in Chantilly, Virginia, used wiretaps, undercover operations and informants to map Hezbollah’s illicit networks, with the help of 30 U.S. and foreign security agencies.

They followed cocaine shipments, some from Latin America to West Africa and on to Europe and the Middle East, and others through Venezuela and Mexico to the United States. They tracked the river of dirty cash as it was laundered by, among other tactics, buying American used cars and shipping them to Africa. And with the help of some key cooperating witnesses, the agents traced the conspiracy, they believed, to the innermost circle of Hezbollah and its state sponsors in Iran.



But as Project Cassandra reached higher into the hierarchy of the conspiracy, Obama administration officials threw an increasingly insurmountable series of roadblocks in its way, according to interviews with dozens of participants who in many cases spoke for the first time about events shrouded in secrecy, and a review of government documents and court records. When Project Cassandra leaders sought approval for some significant investigations, prosecutions, arrests and financial sanctions, officials at the Justice and Treasury departments delayed, hindered or rejected their requests


https://www.politico.com/interactives/2017/obama-hezbollah-drug-trafficking-investigation/

Hezbollah got paid coming and going--free rein to make billions to finance their terrorism by dumping drugs in the U.S and a billion dollars in cash delivered by Obama at the end. Even Kerry said Iran would use that money to support terrorism.

Obama thought this Iran deal would be the crown jewel in his "legacy" and didn't give a crap about the nation's security and well-being if it had suffer in order to appease Iran. It's treason, really.
Builder
 
  -2  
Fri 22 Dec, 2017 10:17 pm
@layman,
Quote:
This is a long (and long-researched) article by the senior investigative reporter...{snip}


More like a novella than an article. It's apparent that apart from the DEA, FBI, and CIA, the Pentagon has their own duplicates of these same orgs. No wonder they say they can't "account" for the money they are given. They've got a department to investigate money laundering by the other orgs, too? But not their own, apparently.

I know it's a yuuuuuuuuge nation you have there, but a lot of the issues you're currently facing are based on too many spooks chasing too many spooks. The paranoia is such that most of the investigative energy is wasted on finding out who is lying more than whom.

Let's see what comes of it. AG Sessions has some work to do on this one.
0 Replies
 
NSFW (view)
Builder
 
  -2  
Sat 23 Dec, 2017 12:06 am
@layman,
Who is this Rosie woman? And why does the media favor her?
layman
 
  -3  
Sat 23 Dec, 2017 12:33 am
@Builder,
Builder wrote:

Who is this Rosie woman? And why does the media favor her?


You're askin the wrong perv, homey. Only God knows that.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -4  
Sat 23 Dec, 2017 12:43 am
@layman,
There's a point in that clip where Trump says:

Quote:
I'm not running for office. I don't have to be politically correct. I don't have to be a nice person. Like, I watch some of these weak-kneed politicians--it's disgusting. I don't have to be that way.


He didn't have to be that way when he WAS running for office, either, eh?
0 Replies
 
Blickers
 
  5  
Sat 23 Dec, 2017 12:46 am
@roger,
Quote roger:
Quote:
I think it has been obvious for some time that Trump couldn't care less about our reputation around the world.

That's true. So far it hasn't affected us economically. But if things continue in this chaotic fashion in Washington, it will affect the confidence other countries and foreign individuals have in buying our government securities which finance our debt. The less confidence in our government = fewer people wanting to buy US securities = higher interest rates must be offered to get people to buy them = a greater percentage of the budget must be devoted to paying the debt. As it is now, less than 10% of the budget need be used for that, but if we need to raise the interest rate the securities pay, that will change. And it will be much worse for us.
Below viewing threshold (view)
Builder
 
  -2  
Sat 23 Dec, 2017 01:02 am
@Blickers,
Quote:
But if things continue in this chaotic fashion in Washington, it will affect the confidence other countries and foreign individuals have in buying our government securities which finance our debt.


Aaah, Blinkers, I hate to break this to ya at this time of the season, but quantitative easing was put in place because nobody was interested in US treasury bonds after the ponzi scheme was exposed in 2007-8 GFC.

The fed has been selling those bonds at a cut rate to wall street, then buying them back, to keep the show rolling. Not sure what they're going to do with those bonds, but they don't "mature" for a while, and those dicks on the board of the fed will be dead by then.

It's called kicking the can down the road a ways, and it's been the modus operandi for a while now.
Builder
 
  -1  
Sat 23 Dec, 2017 01:42 am
@Blickers,
Quote:
The less confidence in our government = fewer people wanting to buy US securities = higher interest rates must be offered to get people to buy them = a greater percentage of the budget must be devoted to paying the debt.


You might want to take a peek at this link, to see how making money out of thin air actually affects the economy, Blinkers.

0 Replies
 
Below viewing threshold (view)
Below viewing threshold (view)
Builder
 
  0  
Sat 23 Dec, 2017 02:02 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
Actually everyone was interested in US treasury bonds.


Interested in off-loading them.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Sat 23 Dec, 2017 02:06 am
@Builder,
Nope. Everyone was rushing to buy them. We were able to sell them all at zero percent interest.
Builder
 
  -1  
Sat 23 Dec, 2017 02:21 am
@oralloy,
And you'll be sharing a cite for this claim, right?

Wall street was profiting from buying them.

Do I need to explain the process again for the slow-witted?
oralloy
 
  -4  
Sat 23 Dec, 2017 02:54 am
@Builder,
Builder wrote:
And you'll be sharing a cite for this claim, right?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/10/business/10markets.html


Builder wrote:
Wall street was profiting from buying them.

0% profit sounds quite lucrative.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.93 seconds on 11/14/2024 at 11:48:52